The Mongolians managed not only to endure but grow for the better part of a century through like 4 or 5 stable Khans. That's more stable than the Roman average.
How plausible it for a German victory in WWII?
- Thread starter MrNumbahOne
- Start date
Define German victory.
OTL German war aims were impossible (indeed, they probably did about as well as they could hope). A more limited set of aims? Perhaps, though taking out the craziness in turn affects the way the war is fought: a sensible Hitler wouldn't have made the big successful gambles of 1938-1940.
OTL German war aims were impossible (indeed, they probably did about as well as they could hope). A more limited set of aims? Perhaps, though taking out the craziness in turn affects the way the war is fought: a sensible Hitler wouldn't have made the big successful gambles of 1938-1940.
Yes but compare the life of Rome, to that of the Mongols.in which remnants of the Roman Empire were still around at the time of Mongolian Hungary invasion
How about if the US went full isolationist and so not giving any Land-Lease, the Japanese did not go war crazy and do not bother with the Chinese and so look a lot less war-mongering and of course no Pearl Harbour?
Well yeah. But there isn't any way to avoid war with the U.S. except withdrawing from China and Indochina. Japan won't do that under virtually any circumstances. A government which tried would rapidly find its junior officers pointing guns at them.
A Germany which is willing to sign treaties (and then not break them) with the WAllies is not Nazi Germany.
And where does this idea of generals taking over following Hitler's death come from? The Nazis hated and distrusted the Heer, there's no way Hitler leaves it intact after some kind of victory. More likely the SS (read Himmler or worse) takes charge, then you get the even worse nuts in power. Assassination attempts against Hitler meanwhile were halfhearted when things were going to shit, in a magical world where National Socialism has marched from triumph to triumph on the backs of tens of millions of murders there likely won't be any major attempts to overthrow Hitler.
Last edited:
redlightning
Banned
The Soviets will eventually defeat the Nazis no matter what situation occurs even if its many longs years of of attrition. The German's fiscal policy will cause the government and their gains in Europe to crumble within a decade or two. The Nazis will never win truly and will even potentially after sacking Moscow be in perpetual war all across Europe with resistance movements and guerrillas.
Last edited:
Maybe if the allies are dumb enough to declare war on the Soviets after they invaded Poland.
I'd like to see Hitler's reaction to having the Soviet Union as his primary military ally.
I'd like to see Hitler's reaction to having the Soviet Union as his primary military ally.
Laughing at the fact that Soviet troopes were dying in the Middle East and thinking that this front was heavily taxing Soviet military might. And then when he invades, shock at the fact that the Red Army didn't fall apart in the first two months of Barbarossa.
____________________________
On the issue of how likely Germany was to win, I'd say between 1% and 10% depending on how many PODs you use. Despite the fact that Nazi Germany seemingly did better than its WWI counterpart, the weight of power arrayed against Germany in WWII was considerably greater and the Nazis never really came as close to victory as the Kaiserreich did.
What my time on this board has taught me is that there is no one POD that can change the outcome of WWII in favour of the Nazis; you need at least a half-dozen at the same time to make it work. Preferably more than that, and some of them should be before the war if possible.
Would require Roosevelt getting kicked in the 1940 election, which is IMO kind of difficult considering he ran closer in the popular vote than the electorate one. Not going to place numbers on it myself, because I'm not sure, but I think that every step they took after the war started, were the ones they were forced to take by their economic situation.
Yes. That's the point. And against whom.
That can be solved by removing Hitler by a heart attack on September 4, 1939. Still any successor would have pretty limited options by then.
I am assuming that "after the war starts in 1939" means that the PODs (and probably multiple divergencies would be needed) have to take place after that, not before.
Define victory.
A favorable peace (Germany keep Poland and maybe acquires some Soviet territory; France is neutered; the Soviet Union is weakened but still stands but the British get off with no major concessions) is plausible and fairly possible up till 1942 with the right alignment of events, and while less plausible is possible into 1943. Of cause, the willingness of the Germans to settle for this and for the other powers to treat such a peace as much more than a chance to prepare for round 2 is far from a given.
A total German victory, complete with the British and Soviets subjugated is perhaps not entirely ASB but certainly pushing the boundary.
A favorable peace (Germany keep Poland and maybe acquires some Soviet territory; France is neutered; the Soviet Union is weakened but still stands but the British get off with no major concessions) is plausible and fairly possible up till 1942 with the right alignment of events, and while less plausible is possible into 1943. Of cause, the willingness of the Germans to settle for this and for the other powers to treat such a peace as much more than a chance to prepare for round 2 is far from a given.
A total German victory, complete with the British and Soviets subjugated is perhaps not entirely ASB but certainly pushing the boundary.
I didn't say they were perfect, but a lot of people seem to be under the impression that Genghis Khan conquered most of Asia then it fell apart when he died. In reality it grew under each successive Khan through multiple generations. When it fell apart it was mostly because that unlike Rome it had no natural transit network to hold it together, yet Mongolian successor states survived and even conquered new lands for centuries (the Mughals for instance were sort of successors).
The only way Germany could win (for values of win) would be if they got really lucky.
Halifax as PM would have done a deal in 1940 to preserve the Empire and have accepted limits on the RAF and RN to do it (limits on bomber squadrons and no expansion of the RN's carrier and heavy forces for example). Roosevelt dropping dead in 1939 could have made things easier for Adolf and co. If Stalin had purged the Red Army in 1940, instead of 1936 and shot a few more generals instead of arresting them and rehabilitating them later on the Red Army would have fallen apart on a larger scale in 1941. To go for the win you would need Stalin's health to fail in 1941 instead of 12 years later and for there to have been a succession crisis.
That would have allowed the Nazi's to take and hold Western Europe (with a neutralized UK), overrun the Soviet Union west of the Urals and allow the Italians to grab various bits of North Africa (excluding British possessions in the Mid East). However the Germans would have still faced an ongoing guerilla war in Russia, low level resistance activity in occupied western Europe, economic issues and political infighting. It is likely their diplomatic relations with the rest of the World would have been problematic also. There are certainly doubts whether a Nazi empire would have lasted for any prolonged period of time.
Halifax as PM would have done a deal in 1940 to preserve the Empire and have accepted limits on the RAF and RN to do it (limits on bomber squadrons and no expansion of the RN's carrier and heavy forces for example). Roosevelt dropping dead in 1939 could have made things easier for Adolf and co. If Stalin had purged the Red Army in 1940, instead of 1936 and shot a few more generals instead of arresting them and rehabilitating them later on the Red Army would have fallen apart on a larger scale in 1941. To go for the win you would need Stalin's health to fail in 1941 instead of 12 years later and for there to have been a succession crisis.
That would have allowed the Nazi's to take and hold Western Europe (with a neutralized UK), overrun the Soviet Union west of the Urals and allow the Italians to grab various bits of North Africa (excluding British possessions in the Mid East). However the Germans would have still faced an ongoing guerilla war in Russia, low level resistance activity in occupied western Europe, economic issues and political infighting. It is likely their diplomatic relations with the rest of the World would have been problematic also. There are certainly doubts whether a Nazi empire would have lasted for any prolonged period of time.
Deleted member 1487
If the European Axis fought the USSR one on one without a British blockade they would have won. The problem is making that happen, which is very difficult. Germany had a very narrow path to victory, which was badly undermined by the Nazi system and Hitler's leadership in particular; starting pre-war the wheels already started coming off with Walter Wever's death and the 'Goering-ification' of the Luftwaffe and economy. It was only downhill from there, especially in 1938 when Hitler started asserting himself over his generals with the removal of Blomberg and Fritsch (not that the Germans generals were particularly great either). Its possible without certain deaths along the way and gets somewhat better if Hitler were to die before the DoW on the US, the earlier the better, but its still an outside chance at best. Which is partly why Hitler made sure to remove the nay-sayers from the decision making process when it came to war and several prominent Nazis made careers on telling Hitler exactly what he wanted to hear.
The "Nazi Germany will not win, period." Is pretty deterministic for an altermnate history forum. I'm not saying they could have won easily, or completely conquered the world, but beating the Soviets could have been done.
After all, how likely was Germany getting as far as it did in the first place?
After all, how likely was Germany getting as far as it did in the first place?
Exactly. That's the point. Have you considered the possibility that they already did that through a more than average amount of luck and unpredictability? So that every further improvement becomes more and more unlikely?
I think it has been convincingly argued ad nauseum that Germany has zero chance of winning once the US enters the war. Against just the USSR, it is 50/50 that Germany can force some sort of peace where they sit on top of a large chunk of Ukraine, the Baltic states, and Belarus. The western Axis was able to call upon about just as many men and the Soviets and they killed the Soviets at a much higher clip than vice versa. Honestly, with no DoW against America and no Operation Tyfun, and chances of German victory actually become more likely than Soviet victory.
Of course, this requires butterflies that only benefit Germany. There are innumerable pro-allied butterflies too you know.
Of course, this requires butterflies that only benefit Germany. There are innumerable pro-allied butterflies too you know.
Germany needed Britain out of the way, and then go after the Soviet Union. Sea Lion wasn't going to cut it, and a Med strategy would still leave Britain's Home Fleet intact. And a separate peace with Britain wasn't going to happen after Britain so tragically let down Czechoslovakia.
One of the short stories in Third Reich Victorious has Britain capitulate following a bombing campaign. In that scenario, Britain has used up its fighter planes and has nothing left to defend it from the Blitz.
Saphroneth
Banned
The basic problem there is with a German victory in WW2 is that a leadership sane enough to take the "one possible path" from, say, OTL 1940 onwards is a leadership which would look at the correlation of forces way back in 1936 and say "You know what, let's be happy with Anschluss."
It's not really a bad thing to accept some things as basically impossible. If someone asked "What are the odds that the New World could colonise the Old World after Columbus found them" you'd probably get a lot of 0% votes.
As for Germany making it to where they got OTL, I view them as having had ~10% odds of getting that far. The Japanese were roughly on par, maybe even luckier. The Italians were the only major Axis power I see doing similarly on most run-throughs, the other two had such insane luck.